DFP and DFO vs DFP: SAEs
DFP and DFO showed no clear difference in incidence of SAEs compared with DFP (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
DFP and DFO vs DFP Incidence of SAEs · improving adherence to iron chelation therapy in people with sickle cell disease or thalassaemia DFP and DFO showed no clear difference in incidence of SAEs compared with DFP (low certainty). Interventions for improving adherence to iron chelation therapy in people with sickle cell disease or… (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD012349.PUB2, superseded | RR 0.15 [0.01, 2.81] | 1 study · 213 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for improving adherence to iron chelation therapy in people with sickle cell disease or thalassaemia 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.